PDA

View Full Version : What's the real deal with Obama being Muslim?



OffspringHead
10-22-2008, 07:53 PM
Was he or was he not a Muslim. Is the Democratic Party trying to cover it up or was he never a Muslim? I read a quote from Powell saying something when he endorsed Obama that was like:

"He is not a Muslim and was never a Muslim. And even if he was a Muslim, what's wrong with that? What's wrong with a Muslim running the country?"

That's not the exact quote but it was something along those lines. I could give a rats ass if he were Muslim or not. I'm just curious.

nieh
10-22-2008, 08:03 PM
He is not and never has been a Muslim. His father was raised by Muslims but was an atheist himself and his mother was raised by Christians, neither of them did much to imprint their beliefs on him.

Rag Doll
10-22-2008, 08:07 PM
Obama is, in fact, a Pastafarian.

nieh
10-22-2008, 08:13 PM
Holy shit, I would love that to be true.

Jebus
10-22-2008, 08:48 PM
It's unbelievable people still don't know he's christian after all this time.

IamSam
10-22-2008, 09:26 PM
It's unbelievable people still don't know he's christian after all this time.

No shit. Apparently those videos of him at his church were great propaganda...

OffspringHead
10-22-2008, 09:31 PM
I know he's Christian. I was just curious to whether or not he USED to be Muslim.

Little_Miss_1565
10-23-2008, 07:20 AM
*facepalm*

JohnnyNemesis
10-23-2008, 10:03 AM
^What she said/did.

0r4ng3
10-23-2008, 11:31 AM
Nope, he was never Muslim.

And I third the Pastafarian thing.

metalmania
10-23-2008, 12:20 PM
Nope, he was never Muslim.

And I third the Pastafarian thing. hehe i dont care about his relegion and maybe he is muslim or christian or buddhist or atheist maybe he worships to a cow.who knows?hehe so this subject is so comic and relegions or missioners dont manage countries or nations,its so easy ;) so leave them and let god manages other world :D and politicians manage our world.ok?

0r4ng3
10-23-2008, 12:25 PM
Don't get me wrong, I do agree, whatever deity (if any at all) a politician worships should be irrelevant to how they run a government. But he did ask, so I answered.

T-6005
10-23-2008, 12:48 PM
It would be pretty awesome, wouldn't it, if he was a Pastafarian, won, and then his wikipedia article read:


Barack Obama is the first sitting president to be openly Pastafarian. [citation needed]

Bipolar Bear
10-23-2008, 08:55 PM
If someone is stupid enough to believe the Earth is 5000 years old and that
snakes can talk, I think it's fair to say that they shouldn't run a country. Anyone
who isn't atheist has some serious thinking to do.

IamSam
10-23-2008, 09:06 PM
If someone is stupid enough to believe the Earth is 5000 years old and that
snakes can talk, I think it's fair to say that they shouldn't run a country. Anyone
who isn't atheist has some serious thinking to do.

Bipolar you ignorant slut. It's 10,000 years and Lucifer casting himself as a snake. Many past presidents who have been very good have also believed in the existence of a God.

That_Guy91
10-23-2008, 09:11 PM
If someone is stupid enough to believe the Earth is 5000 years old and that
snakes can talk, I think it's fair to say that they shouldn't run a country. Anyone
who isn't atheist has some serious thinking to do.

Yeah, every single person in the world is either a young earth creationist or an atheist. There's no alternative or middle ground.

Llamas
10-23-2008, 09:18 PM
Yeah, every single person in the world is either a young earth creationist or an atheist. There's no alternative or middle ground.

I lol'd. Seriously.

This thread is full of wtf is wrong with you people.

HornyPope
10-23-2008, 10:12 PM
I know he's Christian. I was just curious to whether or not he USED to be Muslim.

And do what???

Sell your information to internet blogs?

Are you writing a paper? Are you doing research?

Are you from the gestapo?

HornyPope
10-23-2008, 10:15 PM
I used to be a Muslim. For a year. I converted to Islam and then converted out of Islam and I told NOBODY ABOUT IT.

JohnnyNemesis
10-24-2008, 09:35 AM
Ugh, there's absolutely nothing worse than a dogmatic atheist.

jacknife737
10-24-2008, 01:10 PM
Obviously he's not a Muslim; he is however a secret Muslim, i heard it from a guy who says Sean Hannity told him so.

OffspringHead
10-24-2008, 01:21 PM
And do what???

Sell your information to internet blogs?

Are you writing a paper? Are you doing research?

Are you from the gestapo?

I can't just be curious?

OffspringHead
10-24-2008, 01:22 PM
If someone is stupid enough to believe the Earth is 5000 years old and that
snakes can talk, I think it's fair to say that they shouldn't run a country. Anyone
who isn't atheist has some serious thinking to do.

Agreed. But morals such as not to kill, steal, cheat, lie, be a good person, be loving, etc. are a good message. So religion isn't all that bad. Some of the nicest and generous people in the world are hardcore Christians =o.

Little_Miss_1565
10-24-2008, 01:43 PM
I used to be a Muslim. For a year. I converted to Islam and then converted out of Islam and I told NOBODY ABOUT IT.

Oh man, you were a genuine SECRET MUSLIM!

metalmania
10-24-2008, 02:02 PM
wow relegion scientists re here hehe its so funny.relegion and management:D god,lucifer,angels,demons and more.....damn! they re out of the management of countries.cant ya see? so nevermind lets leave him he believes his world.but real agenda is ;will obama or mccain be succesfull? will they attack to other countries like junior bush ? will oil and weapon inc. use them for policy? and what will they do for crisis? its ok? there re our wolrd's problems!not relegion or mistic things!i dont care about relegions and people's relegions!so wait and bleed :)

Vera
10-24-2008, 02:18 PM
Short answer: no.

Long answer: no, he really wasn't & isn't (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/06/was_obama_a_muslim.html).

Sunny
10-24-2008, 02:52 PM
Agreed. But morals such as not to kill, steal, cheat, lie, be a good person, be loving, etc. are a good message. So religion isn't all that bad. Some of the nicest and generous people in the world are hardcore Christians =o.

having morals does NOT equal being religious. none of these virtues are exclusive to Christian teachings. most responsible, decent people believe these to be absolutely essential regardless of whatever god might've said or not.

btw, if you only refrain from killing and stealing because you think an invisible dude in the sky is watching you, chances are you're not truly a good person. refraining from evil deeds because you're afraid of punishment from heaven doesn't make you a decent human being.


Anyone
who isn't atheist has some serious thinking to do.

Anyone who has their head that far up their ass has some SERIOUS wiggling to do. if you don't pull it out ASAP, you might suffocate on your own bullshit.

wheelchairman
10-24-2008, 05:46 PM
Is it just me or was there unwarrent forcus on bigheads post which was largely sarcastic?

And to the original poser. He was never a muslim. That is the reason why so many replies were posted ridiculing you for the belief of the possibility he was one. It's not directly your problem it's just that it appears you have a shamefully uninformative source of information. If I were you I would focus on improving the quality of my source of information, if at least to avoid such embarrassing mistakes like this post. Just an honest piece of advice.

IamSam
10-24-2008, 07:19 PM
Is it just me or was there unwarrent forcus on bigheads post which was largely sarcastic?



bighead never posted in this thread.

wheelchairman
10-25-2008, 01:40 AM
I was really drunk I'm not sure if I meant Offspringhead or if I thought I was replying to a different thread.

EDIT: Oh yeah i meant bipolar bear.

Bipolar Bear
10-25-2008, 01:45 AM
It's 10,000 years and Lucifer casting himself as a snake.


Does that really change anything? It's still ridiculous and changes NOTHING AT ALL. Sorry if I haven't personally read every detail of the bible; I think it's bullshit. And I'm so very sorry it's not 5000 years, and rather 10 000. In that case it's totally ok to believe that; it changes everything!



Anyone who has their head that far up their ass has some SERIOUS wiggling to do. if you don't pull it out ASAP, you might suffocate on your own bullshit.

Sorry if it sounds offensive. It probably is. I just don't see how anyone can believe in their religion when there are all these
proofs going against it; not to mention all the problems that have been caused by religion and the fact that EVERY religion
claims it's the only right one and most use fear (such as hell) to control its followers. There's no excuse for believing in such
stupidity nowadays, with all the information available people should be able to judge for themselves that religions are probably
untrue.

Vera
10-25-2008, 03:08 AM
Not every religion claims to be the RIGHT one. In fact it seems like only three of the major BOOK religions (a lot of places in the world they practise religion with no holy scripts, just beliefs and mythology transmitted and taught via spoken word) are against synchronism aka mixing of religions. And the single-god book religions (Judaism, Islam & Christianity) all originate from the same area. Go figure.

People have a tendency to think of religion as only the religion of their respective area. It makes sense in every-day conversations (when I saw I'm not religious I mean I don't believe in the Christian god or belong to the Evangelist-Lutheran Church that 90-something percent of Finland does) but it really pays to find out more about world religions and local traditions as well.

Out of other religions, Buddhism I think claims to be "right" but that's more a family of beliefs and traditions than a religion. Hinduism is enormously accepting (excluding the modern day extremist political Hindus who are still the minority of Hindus).

I think extreme atheism can be annoying - there's no real reason to step on people's toes or challenge their faith (their faith does not need to meet the demands of science, faith and science don't cancel each other out until you apply one to the other, which doesn't need to be done) unless their actions step on your toes. And even then the beef is with actions, not the religion itself. To me religion only becomes a problem when you start killing innocents or running a country according to religious beliefs. Governments should remain secular.

Science has replaced the religious "system of knowledge" for explanations for various phenomena ("why does it rain?", "why does this rock fall when I let go of it?", "why do leaves turn yellow and red in autumn?") but if somebody wants to believe that Earth is 6,000 years old against scientific evidence, so be it. I only have a problem when they want to teach it to kids at school as that takes the private belief into a public realm.

Thinking everybody with religious beliefs as stupid is unwarranted arrogance to say the least.

IamSam
10-25-2008, 04:26 AM
Thinking everybody with religious beliefs as stupid is unwarranted arrogance to say the least.

And unwarranted ignorance. Unless you are actually that damn ignorant.

The Search Button
10-25-2008, 06:01 AM
Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheists, Budists or Scientologists. I respect them all. I believe there are infinite paths to accept Jesus Christ as your personal saviour.

Colbert you my hero!

That_Guy91
10-25-2008, 06:25 AM
Now that you brought up science, I just wanted to mention that science doesn't necessarily point towards atheism and I really dislike when people use that excuse.

Sunny
10-25-2008, 07:57 AM
Sorry if it sounds offensive. It probably is. I just don't see how anyone can believe in their religion when there are all these
proofs going against it; not to mention all the problems that have been caused by religion and the fact that EVERY religion
claims it's the only right one and most use fear (such as hell) to control its followers. There's no excuse for believing in such
stupidity nowadays, with all the information available people should be able to judge for themselves that religions are probably
untrue.

it's not that it's offensive, it's just really stupid.

not every religious person is an evangelical who seeks to explain the physical origin of things via religious texts. the Catholic church accepts evolution and the scientific theory of origins. the Dalai Lama frequently expresses interest in modern science and secular ethics. OMG WTF! the mind boggles!

for many people, the "holy books" of their traditions are meant to be metaphors. as in, many Christians don't believe we *actually* descended from Adam and Eve, there was no "apple", "Satan" is not actually a snake, and many Buddhists don't actually believe supreme beings totally have 348609345860 faces each glowing with rainbow light.
these texts are supposed to help people understand and visualize concepts such as "evil", "temptation" or "general awesomeness", which regardless of your religious affiliation, are all real human concepts. you'd be surprised how many people do not take these texts literally. those who believe Earth is 5000 years old and we were "created in a day" are a minority - a loud, obnoxious minority, surely - but a minority all the same.

science and faith, regardless of what those evangelical Christians would like you to believe, are not mutually exclusive, and a person can easily follow both. claiming that atheism is the only path of reason is presumptuous and ignorant. furthermore, your assumption that everyone subscribes to a monotheistic, self-righteous definition of religion only exposes how little you actually know.

also, it's not religion that causes problems, it's people that cause problems. people will fight over any visible difference they discover. it could be skin color, or language, or culture, OR religion. usually, though, it's a desire for money/oil/land that causes problems... and "religion" or values are just a handy excuse. humans have a tendency to be warmongering assholes. atheists are no exception.

metalmania
10-25-2008, 09:19 AM
hehe this subject is the advert of obama and his relegion or relegions hehe!i think that obama may thank to ya all maybe he can kiss ya all so continuation!!!and i see that u like to talk about relegions with obama mask hehe so hevane is waiting for you all!run babe run go to heaven maybe your god can kiss ya there with obama or mccain hehe

bighead384
10-25-2008, 10:44 AM
Does that really change anything? It's still ridiculous and changes NOTHING AT ALL. Sorry if I haven't personally read every detail of the bible; I think it's bullshit. And I'm so very sorry it's not 5000 years, and rather 10 000. In that case it's totally ok to believe that; it changes everything!

Sorry if it sounds offensive. It probably is. I just don't see how anyone can believe in their religion when there are all these
proofs going against it; not to mention all the problems that have been caused by religion and the fact that EVERY religion
claims it's the only right one and most use fear (such as hell) to control its followers. There's no excuse for believing in such
stupidity nowadays, with all the information available people should be able to judge for themselves that religions are probably
untrue.

Maybe Christians have felt something or experienced something that makes them believe what they do, but either way, the Bible is fucking ridiculous. I honestly WANT to believe in God. But this semester, I've been taking "Intro to Bible". And HOLY SHIT is that motherfucking book full of shit like you have no idea.

Seriously, FUCK that whole "it's just metaphors you don't have to take it all literally" bullshit. I used to say that line myself. You know who says that? People who haven't really read the Bible. I'm telling you, there's things in there that are just morally wrong, and factually wrong... and it's got NOTHING to do with being a metaphor. That's what I've learned this semester.

Sunny
10-25-2008, 11:27 AM
Maybe Christians have felt something or experienced something that makes them believe what they do, but either way, the Bible is fucking ridiculous. I honestly WANT to believe in God. But this semester, I've been taking "Intro to Bible". And HOLY SHIT is that motherfucking book full of shit like you have no idea.

Seriously, FUCK that whole "it's just metaphors you don't have to take it all literally" bullshit. I used to say that line myself. You know who says that? People who haven't really read the Bible. I'm telling you, there's things in there that are just morally wrong, and factually wrong... and it's got NOTHING to do with being a metaphor. That's what I've learned this semester.

I've read the entire Bible. more than once.

there are stories of rape, incest, slavery, murder, many of them god-sanctioned. it is a reflection of the times it was written, where selling your daughter to slavery was totally cool, as long as the price is right. the old testament god is much like a human being, in the sense that he gets pissed and wrecks shit and condones abominable acts. if that's what you mean by "full of shit", well, ok. as for factual content, as any book written by people hundreds of years ago, it is bound to have some inaccuracies. uh... and? so?

if you don't think the story of Adam and Eve, the apple, the exile, the Song of Songs, the great flood, the story of Job, Jonah and the whale... if you don't think those are metaphors/parables, then i am honestly at a loss. these stories are told in a way that would appeal to people at the time it was written, which does not and should not discredit the mystical/metaphorical meaning of the parables. perhaps, however, an "Intro to the Bible" course would just go over the literal meaning. i wouldn't be surprised.

metalmania
10-25-2008, 11:33 AM
Maybe Christians have felt something or experienced something that makes them believe what they do, but either way, the Bible is fucking ridiculous. I honestly WANT to believe in God. But this semester, I've been taking "Intro to Bible". And HOLY SHIT is that motherfucking book full of shit like you have no idea.

Seriously, FUCK that whole "it's just metaphors you don't have to take it all literally" bullshit. I used to say that line myself. You know who says that? People who haven't really read the Bible. I'm telling you, there's things in there that are just morally wrong, and factually wrong... and it's got NOTHING to do with being a metaphor. That's what I've learned this semester.hehe!sorry dude but i have to ask it; where were your god when military powers kill to people on the earth?huh?where were? dont use the relegions or dont use the god!u 'd just kill god like nietzche.so nevermind god nevermind your belief

bighead384
10-25-2008, 04:50 PM
I've read the entire Bible. more than once.

Geez, I don't know many people who have read the Bible even once. Are you some sort of Bible scholar, or are you Christian?


there are stories of rape, incest, slavery, murder, many of them god-sanctioned. it is a reflection of the times it was written, where selling your daughter to slavery was totally cool, as long as the price is right. the old testament god is much like a human being, in the sense that he gets pissed and wrecks shit and condones abominable acts. if that's what you mean by "full of shit", well, ok. as for factual content, as any book written by people hundreds of years ago, it is bound to have some inaccuracies. uh... and? so?
You seem to be saying that if it was a societal norm back in those times, it's not immoral. I just don't understand how that makes sense. Especially if it's GOD'S book that's meant to help people understand, not confuse them and create doubt with inaccuracies and immoralities.


perhaps, however, an "Intro to the Bible" course would just go over the literal meaning. i wouldn't be surprised.

No, my professor often discusses meanings and interpretations, especially with the more controversial biblical passages.

IamSam
10-25-2008, 05:36 PM
It's also a cultural groups history book. Keep that in mind as well.

bighead384
10-25-2008, 06:00 PM
It's also a cultural groups history book. Keep that in mind as well.

Why? This discussion is about the Bible as a religious book.

Sunny
10-25-2008, 06:32 PM
Geez, I don't know many people who have read the Bible even once. Are you some sort of Bible scholar, or are you Christian?


neither. in high school, we were asked to read the entire Bible as a literary work for my lit class. then i went back to it on my own. it's just interesting on the same level the Tibetan Book of the Dead is interesting. now that's a sick read, by the way.



You seem to be saying that if it was a societal norm back in those times, it's not immoral. I just don't understand how that makes sense. Especially if it's GOD'S book that's meant to help people understand, not confuse them and create doubt with inaccuracies and immoralities.

it doesn't make it "not immoral", but it explains some of the things written in it. the fact that it mentions atrocities doesn't make it a bad book or a book that should be disregarded. it should, however, be read in context of the time it was created.

as i said, it is a book written for people by people. it's likely they weren't even unaware of the inaccuracies in the text, and wrote it in good faith. maybe they thought that if they describe a fearsome god, people would be more compelled to follow his word out of awe or sheer terror. it's a good way to keep people in line, right?

then of course god's behavior changes quite a bit in the new testament... but i doubt that's the part you're objecting to.

btw, you'd be hard pressed to find a religious text that's not totally fucked up in some parts.

IamSam
10-25-2008, 10:01 PM
Why? This discussion is about the Bible as a religious book.

Because discussing it purely as a religious book takes much out of context. Keep up.

Jesus
10-27-2008, 02:56 PM
I wish he was, maybe 'may Allah continue to bless America' would make some people realize how ridiculous the whole god bless phrase is. Fuck knows, considering this whole Muslim thing, what would happen if a president would decide to use a book about string theory or digital physics in his inauguration ceremony.

nieh
10-27-2008, 03:11 PM
I've never understood why if someone can't accept the idea behind the Christian god, they completely reject the idea of god in general despite there being a virtually infinite list of other ideas out there.

Jesus
10-27-2008, 04:31 PM
I've never understood why if someone can't accept the idea behind the Christian god, they completely reject the idea of god in general despite there being a virtually infinite list of other ideas out there.

Sure, but 99.9999999% of those are also stupid. The Christian (or Catholic) version is indeed quite ridiculous to begin with because of the trinity of the holy spirit, father and son. Which in essence are all the same (talk about confusing marketing, no wonder they needed a Pope).

But true, the bad thing about the post modernist egocentric evolution of the concept 'God' is that everyone defines it as he or she likes. Compared to the good old days where a large group of people all held the same moronic views because those where the views of the community or the elders in the community, no questions asked. This made it easier to be a flat out atheist, because the concepts you needed to reject were quite limited. Now quite a lot of people think they are center of the 'god making business' so they make up whatever concept of god, meaning there are a infinite interpretations out there. Which indeeds makes it much more difficult to completely reject it, because there might be one out there you could agree with, safety is in the numbers. So yeah it depends if you care about that small chance or not. I personally don't.
The good thing about this evolution is that all these individualistic interpretations of the concept of God, make it difficult to transform it into a (political) movement. People most likely won't agree with each other on the issues they need to push forward and hence further privatize 'religion' and take it out of the public sphere. Which is all good stuff.

Little_Miss_1565
10-27-2008, 04:55 PM
You seem to be saying that if it was a societal norm back in those times, it's not immoral. I just don't understand how that makes sense. Especially if it's GOD'S book that's meant to help people understand, not confuse them and create doubt with inaccuracies and immoralities.


it doesn't make it "not immoral", but it explains some of the things written in it. the fact that it mentions atrocities doesn't make it a bad book or a book that should be disregarded. it should, however, be read in context of the time it was created.

What Sunny said. It was not only socially acceptable but socially expected for people to do some seriously fucked up shit in the contemporary times of the old testament. The new testament directly contradicts a lot of it. It was a book written by scores of different people from different viewpoints at different points in time, so of course it's completely fucked when you try to force certain contemporary norms of sense onto it. Also what she said about 'good faith.' You know the books of the Bible were not put together into one volume until many centuries after the death of Jesus, right?

IamSam
10-27-2008, 07:00 PM
You're all going to hell and I'll be laughing from my cloud.

jacknife737
10-27-2008, 07:35 PM
You're all going to hell and I'll be laughing from my cloud.

Praise the Lord.

Bipolar Bear
10-27-2008, 08:58 PM
Trying to prove that a religion is bullshit to a religious person:
something that's nearly impossible to do even when you know you're right.

Religion is appealing in the sense that it creates a certain security for an individual
who doesn't have the wits to imagine himself his own bogus story about creation.

I'm therefore abandoning, but I say this again: anyone who strongly believes in
religion is a complete idiot. I'm not even going to go through the trouble of proving
this since it would be a complete waste of time [see first sentence]. I apologize in
advance for these strong, controversial words. I hope they don't make you think,
we surely wouldn't want that, would we? Well, I won't worry about it too much.
You'll probably disregarded most of it as untrue due to your biased religious views.
At least you can tell yourself that I'll suffer for in hell and you all won't, right?
Because that's what a good God would do to punish the unworthy: punish them for
eternity.

randman21
10-27-2008, 09:03 PM
Do Pat Robertson, John Hagee, and the late Jerry Falwell piss you off as much as they did me? If so, I just want you to know that you're being infinitely more douchebaggy than they ever were.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 12:03 AM
What Sunny said. It was not only socially acceptable but socially expected for people to do some seriously fucked up shit in the contemporary times of the old testament. The new testament directly contradicts a lot of it. It was a book written by scores of different people from different viewpoints at different points in time, so of course it's completely fucked when you try to force certain contemporary norms of sense onto it. Also what she said about 'good faith.' You know the books of the Bible were not put together into one volume until many centuries after the death of Jesus, right?

You're STILL discussing what humans have done. As soon as you do that, you're not answering the question I've raised. This is supposed to be GOD'S book. Human beings wrote it, but they were supposedly inspired by God. So if anything in that book is immoral or inaccurate, then I guess God fucked up. You and Sunny completely missed the point, even though what you're saying is true on some level.

IamSam
10-28-2008, 12:06 AM
I'm laughing a lot right now that Bipolar thinks he/she/it is better than the majority of earth's population because he/she/it doesn't have the kahonas to believe in things unseen. Oh this moment is so great that I want to have sex with it, make a bunch of little moments, and then cheat on the moment we had before.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 12:08 AM
I'm laughing a lot right now that Bipolar thinks he/she/it is better than the majority of earth's population because he/she/it doesn't have the kahonas to believe in things unseen.

Ok great, now explain how this isn't completely retarded.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 12:10 AM
Trying to prove that a religion is bullshit to a religious person:
something that's nearly impossible to do even when you know you're right

But you don't KNOW you're right. You can suspect, but you come across the wrong way when you say things like that. Even if you're going to acknowledge that you're being controversial, you shouldn't say that because it's wrong.

WebDudette
10-28-2008, 12:15 AM
Am I the only person who is atheist mostly out of apathy? I mean, I find most religions ridiculous and irrational but my atheism is still based in just not caring.

IamSam, why so hostile? Yeah Bipolar Bear is making horrible arguments, but to call him an ignorant slut? Thats definitely gonna' get someone to listen to you. Also, I'm fairly certain my dick size has no correlation with what I find to be rational/irrational.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 12:23 AM
If God ever tells me I'm going to hell for not believing in him I'm just gonna be like "How the fuck was I supposed to know?" Or "Uh...well I believe in you now, hehe...does that count"?

randman21
10-28-2008, 04:05 AM
I'm laughing a lot right now that Bipolar thinks he/she/it is better than the majority of earth's population because he/she/it doesn't have the kahonas to believe in things unseen.
Cajones.



Also, I'm fairly certain my dick size has no correlation with what I find to be rational/irrational.
Testicles.

JohnnyNemesis
10-28-2008, 09:06 AM
(talk about confusing marketing, no wonder they needed a Pope).

I just laughed. Out loud. In a public library :o

Bipolar Bear
10-28-2008, 09:19 AM
But you don't KNOW you're right. You can suspect, but you come across the wrong way when you say things like that. Even if you're going to acknowledge that you're being controversial, you shouldn't say that because it's wrong.

Yes, except no. I didn't say I was sure about anything. I was saying that
people who are sure about something are completely retarded. They're the
ones who pretend they're right. I'm saying it's wrong to believe ANYTHING.
How can someone be sure about something as silly as religion? What I was
trying to explain was my certainty about my uncertainty. I'm 100% certain
that to strongly believe in religion is wrong, because you just aren't sure.
The chances of that shit being true are lower than your gradma's boobs.


Am I the only person who is atheist mostly out of apathy? I mean, I find most religions ridiculous and irrational but my atheism is still based in just not caring.

IamSam, why so hostile? Yeah Bipolar Bear is making horrible arguments, but to call him an ignorant slut? Thats definitely gonna' get someone to listen to you. Also, I'm fairly certain my dick size has no correlation with what I find to be rational/irrational.

Thanks, I suppose. Yes, Iamsam is a complete idiot and he's being rude for
the sake of it, like always. Being one of the worst assholes on the boards, I
find it rather surprising that he doesn't get reprimanded more often. I think it's
mostly due to the fact that he takes the safe, cowardly path of swearing at
people who are already against the popular opinion, therefore placing himself
in a certain security with a group. I'd best describe him as a coward with no
strong opinions or convictions who enjoys putting others down when he has
the chance.

Sunny
10-28-2008, 09:50 AM
You're STILL discussing what humans have done. As soon as you do that, you're not answering the question I've raised. This is supposed to be GOD'S book. Human beings wrote it, but they were supposedly inspired by God. So if anything in that book is immoral or inaccurate, then I guess God fucked up. You and Sunny completely missed the point, even though what you're saying is true on some level.

there's a difference between what it's supposed to be and what it actually IS. the fact is, it IS a book written by people. as for reconciling its contents with your beliefs, well... perhaps you should ask someone who actually believes the bible to be 100% perfect word of god... because i don't think 1565 or i can offer the right perspective.

also: if you drink god's blood (er, wine) at communion and the wine has gone bad and tastes nasty, it's not god's fault, even though it's supposed to be HIS blood. but it was stored by humans and poured by humans and possibly mishandled by humans. just because people believe it is something doesn't mean it actually is. you know?



I hope they don't make you think,
we surely wouldn't want that, would we? Well, I won't worry about it too much. You'll probably disregarded most of it as untrue due to your biased religious views. At least you can tell yourself that I'll suffer for in hell and you all won't, right? Because that's what a good God would do to punish the unworthy: punish them for eternity.

i think about these things enough to know that you're acting like a pathetic, self-righteous, ignorant little bitch. oh and before you jump on your "oh you're biased and religious" pony - i don't believe in hell. or heaven, for that matter. i believe in pointing out ignorant assholery when i see it, however.

Bipolar Bear
10-28-2008, 10:13 AM
i think about these things enough to know that you're acting like a pathetic, self-righteous, ignorant little bitch. oh and before you jump on your "oh you're biased and religious" pony - i don't believe in hell. or heaven, for that matter. i believe in pointing out ignorant assholery when i see it, however.

You don't believe in hell or heaven, yet you've previously pointed out that you read the bible multiple times. And you do sound like someone who believes in God from what you've said up to now. If you don't, good for you.

Let's jump straight to the insults, shall we? Self-righteous..sure! Pathetic..it's quite the contrary I'm afraid. Ignorant? I laugh at this one. You're probably using it since our good friend sammy boy brought it into the conversation. I don't see what I said that would make you think that; in fact I believe that to strongly believe in religion and be biased is true ignorance. Anyone who's seen the facts will agree that there is an overwhelming number of reasons to doubt religion. Finally my personal favorite, little bitch. I don't know where that one came from, you probably added it for good measure. Now let's see, should I go down to your level and insult you back? I don't think so. I'll end this here.

jacknife737
10-28-2008, 10:20 AM
Thanks, I suppose. Yes, Iamsam is a complete idiot and he's being rude for
the sake of it, like always. Being one of the worst assholes on the boards, I
find it rather surprising that he doesn't reprimanded more often. I think it's
mostly due to the fact that he takes the safe, cowardly path of swearing at
people who are already against the popular opinion, therefore placing himself
in a certain security with a group. I'd best describe him as a coward with no
strong opinions or convictions who enjoys putting others down when he has
the chance.

Would you like some cheese with your whine?

Sunny
10-28-2008, 10:30 AM
is believing in god a prerequisite for showing interest in culturally significant texts? since we're talking about making assumptions about my beliefs, i've also read tons of Slavic and Nordic pagan myths, Jewish mystical texts, Tibetan Buddhist tales and existentialist writings, and particularly enjoyed the last two. feel free to continue trying to make assumptions. don't blame me if it gives you a headache.

i am not insulting you for "good measure" or because another BBS member already did, trust me. i am, however, happy to elaborate. you strike me as an atheist of the Richard Dawkins variety - poorly informed, close-minded, unnecessarily militant and with his head lodged firmly up his ass. if this is something you aspire to - and i'm assuming it is, since you're happy to describe yourself as "self righteous" - then pat yourself on the back. you're doing a hell of a good job. since you were wondering where "little bitch" came from, i hope this makes it a little bit clearer.

feel free to address any of these adjectives separately, although it is unlikely it will affect my opinion of you. i recognize half-baked, egotistical bullshit from a mile away, whether it is evangelical Christian or militant atheist. in my book, you're all the same.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 11:04 AM
also: if you drink god's blood (er, wine) at communion and the wine has gone bad and tastes nasty, it's not god's fault, even though it's supposed to be HIS blood. but it was stored by humans and poured by humans and possibly mishandled by humans. just because people believe it is something doesn't mean it actually is. you know?

Yeah, but unlike a little bit of wine, the Bible is the basis for the entire religion. I understand that humans could ruin some things that are holy, but if I am to believe in Christianity, or even believe that it's something that could be considered a rational belief, I think that book that it's based around, that is basically written by God, shouldn't be fucked up or wrong in any way.

Bipolar Bear
10-28-2008, 11:29 AM
is believing in god a prerequisite for showing interest in culturally significant texts? since we're talking about making assumptions about my beliefs, i've also read tons of Slavic and Nordic pagan myths, Jewish mystical texts, Tibetan Buddhist tales and existentialist writings, and particularly enjoyed the last two. feel free to continue trying to make assumptions. don't blame me if it gives you a headache.

i am not insulting you for "good measure" or because another BBS member already did, trust me. i am, however, happy to elaborate. you strike me as an atheist of the Richard Dawkins variety - poorly informed, close-minded, unnecessarily militant and with his head lodged firmly up his ass. if this is something you aspire to - and i'm assuming it is, since you're happy to describe yourself as "self righteous" - then pat yourself on the back. you're doing a hell of a good job. since you were wondering where "little bitch" came from, i hope this makes it a little bit clearer.

feel free to address any of these adjectives separately, although it is unlikely it will affect my opinion of you. i recognize half-baked, egotistical bullshit from a mile away, whether it is evangelical Christian or militant atheist. in my book, you're all the same.

I'm not a close-minded atheist. I see the evidence and it suggests that
religions are probably all fake. I'm amazed that so many people can strongly
believe in religion. Those who are poorly informed are the ones who can't
realize this. It's not because you say I'm something that it's necessarily true,
sunny. You're the one who is poorly informed and biased if you can't
admit that indeed, religions are most probably fake.

By the way, all the adjectives you've used fit exactly in the religious person
profile rather than an atheist. O the irony.

You evidently feel the need to do insult people to get your point across. Indeed,
if you read your posts minus the insults, there's really not much to them. I
encourage you to do this before posting, it'll save us from having a bunch
of worthless semi-serious posts.

metalmania
10-28-2008, 11:39 AM
hey all go and find a church for yourself !and i swear you will find very good 1.class wines/god's blood/ :D there and maybe priests can fill your wineglasses :D be not afraid :p

nieh
10-28-2008, 12:30 PM
Yeah, but unlike a little bit of wine, the Bible is the basis for the entire religion. I understand that humans could ruin some things that are holy, but if I am to believe in Christianity, or even believe that it's something that could be considered a rational belief, I think that book that it's based around, that is basically written by God, shouldn't be fucked up or wrong in any way.

Every religious text started off at best as man's interpretation of God's will. The fact that many of the books were written more than 2000 years ago and have been translated from one language to another to another to another means that most of the stuff you read today is at best man's interpretation of man's interepretation of man's interpretation of God's will. Also, as has been stated, the books were written in an entirely different time and that should be taken into account when you read them. Our culture has changed so much that some books written just 100 years ago seem dated by what's considered socially acceptable today.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 12:37 PM
Every religious text started off at best as man's interpretation of God's will. The fact that many of the books were written more than 2000 years ago and have been translated from one language to another to another to another means that most of the stuff you read today is at best man's interpretation of man's interepretation of man's interpretation of God's will.

Then it sounds to me like God needs to step up his game a little bit. He must really be getting rusty up there. You know, to let that sort of thing happen to the book that is the sole reason anyone would believe in Him (from a Christian perspective). I want to worship a God that's powerful enough to not let the book that the ENTIRE religion is based around be corrupted by mere human beings.

Or maybe I should draw another conclusion...

nieh
10-28-2008, 12:48 PM
That's assuming Christianity, or any other religion out there is the right religion, which I don't believe any are. Although I have been told my beliefs come pretty close to deism, it's kind of hard to say it's an actual religion since there's no text and no teachings, just the idea that god may have initially created things but largely abandoned everything since then.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 12:52 PM
That's assuming Christianity, or any other religion out there is the right religion, which I don't believe any are.

?!?!?!?!

That's my point!!!

nieh
10-28-2008, 12:56 PM
You said you WANT to believe in God but can't because the Bible is stupid, but why do you have to agree with a faulty religion to believe in god?

Thomas
10-28-2008, 01:11 PM
also: if you drink god's blood (er, wine) at communion and the wine has gone bad and tastes nasty, it's not god's fault, even though it's supposed to be HIS blood. but it was stored by humans and poured by humans and possibly mishandled by humans. just because people believe it is something doesn't mean it actually is. you know?




I just wanted to say that this is one of the smartest things I've read in a long time.


Yeah, but unlike a little bit of wine, the Bible is the basis for the entire religion. I understand that humans could ruin some things that are holy, but if I am to believe in Christianity, or even believe that it's something that could be considered a rational belief, I think that book that it's based around, that is basically written by God, shouldn't be fucked up or wrong in any way.

Again, the Bible has been re-written too many times to count, often with kings and other royalties adding changes to better suit themselves. If you make the argument that if God is all-powerful, he should be able to fix his own book, then the argument could be made that God operates in ways no mortal man can understand, so we will never know his true intentions.


That's assuming Christianity, or any other religion out there is the right religion, which I don't believe any are. Although I have been told my beliefs come pretty close to deism, it's kind of hard to say it's an actual religion since there's no text and no teachings, just the idea that god may have initially created things but largely abandoned everything since then.

This is another point I would like to emphasize. If I were to believe in some sort of deity or greater being, I would take the "clock-maker" belief that God created Earth like a clock-maker builds a clock. He gets the whole thing started and lets it run on it's own after that.

IamSam
10-28-2008, 02:35 PM
I'd like to point out a couple things:

1. Thank you for the spelling check, randman. Messed that one up.

2. I actually don't think bipolar is an ignorant slut. I don't know he/she/it. I was making an obscure 'Office' reference that should be disregarded.

3. Bighead: Do you believe in the wind? Can you see the wind? No. You can't see the wind but you can see the effects of the wind. So just because you can't see something or have proof of something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

4. I still stand by my statement that many people that believe in a God or have faith in a God of some sort still have more balls than anyone who is an athiest. It takes courage to believe in something you have no proof of. It takes absolutly nothing to bash religion and the couragous beliefs of others.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 02:55 PM
3. Bighead: Do you believe in the wind? Can you see the wind? No. You can't see the wind but you can see the effects of the wind. So just because you can't see something or have proof of something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


What the fuck are you talking about? No one in this thread is saying that the reason they don't believe is because they can't see God. And belief has nothing to do with "kahonas" .

IamSam
10-28-2008, 02:56 PM
Thanks, I suppose. Yes, Iamsam is a complete idiot and he's being rude for
the sake of it, like always. Being one of the worst assholes on the boards, I
find it rather surprising that he doesn't get reprimanded more often. I think it's
mostly due to the fact that he takes the safe, cowardly path of swearing at
people who are already against the popular opinion, therefore placing himself
in a certain security with a group. I'd best describe him as a coward with no
strong opinions or convictions who enjoys putting others down when he has
the chance.

Actually, going back, I never called you an ignorant slut. But regardless, if I did at some point in time it was at the expense of hoping someone would know what show I was referring to. I apologize if I hurted your feelers.


But this post takes the cake.

1. I am not an idiot. I am actually quite intelligent, unlike some people on this board. (Not referring to you. Don't want to affect your now sensitive feelers you have grown since your banning days).

2. I'm not being as rude as you are being. (Sounds child-like, but true). Openly calling someone's beliefs as being stupid is much more rude. These are beliefs that people hold dear like the truth. It's much like telling a small child that Santa doesn't exist. Dick move. Let people have their beliefs. I see no one calling you stupid for not believing.

3. Wrong. I've actually been a dick to wheelchairman and Sin Studly. Two individuals who have been on here a long time. Me swearing at the people who are against the popular opinion is not a big deal. Why? Those who aren't in the general publics opinion are normally individuals who display a general lack of brain power, a lack of respect, or are non-descript individuals who normally ask for a verbal beat down.

4. I am not a coward, and yes I do have strong convictions. Do I voice these convictions? No. I own up to my mistakes and I stand by what I say. On this board I do not put others down unless it is warrented. Me saying that you lacked the guts to believe in something unseen was completly warrented due to your unwarrented attacks on the majority of the worlds beliefs.

IamSam
10-28-2008, 02:57 PM
What the fuck are you talking about? No one in this thread is saying that the reason they don't believe is because they can't see God. And belief has nothing to do with "kahonas" .

Go back to post 56 in this thread. Then you'll see 'what the fuck' I'm talking about. Keep up.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 03:00 PM
Go back to post 56 in this thread. Then you'll see 'what the fuck' I'm talking about. Keep up.

You're being an idiot. I'm not even going to try to be nice about it.

IamSam
10-28-2008, 03:05 PM
You're being an idiot. I'm not even going to try to be nice about it.

Really? You mean by answering a question you asked me makes me an idiot?

I just wanted to add to some others posts that some of the first major revisions to the Bible were done by Constantine as he was trying to consolidate power in the Mediterranian. He needed something to bind people together, something he could use to possible hold over them, and it was through these revisions that he did so.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 04:36 PM
Really? You mean by answering a question you asked me makes me an idiot?

You directed me to a post where you claim that Bipolar Bear and many others don't believe in God because they don't have the "kahonas" to believe in what they can't see. You didn't explain yourself any better. Rather, it's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard an adult say in a conversation about religion. And I can't believe you won't own up to it.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 04:48 PM
You said you WANT to believe in God but can't because the Bible is stupid, but why do you have to agree with a faulty religion to believe in god?

I don't. This discussion is more about Christianity than belief in God anyway.

WebDudette
10-28-2008, 06:46 PM
Iamsam, so what you are saying is; that because I don't believe in God and Heaven I am a coward?

You are implying, that I, an atheist who doesn't by into the possibility of a God or omnipotent being am cowardly? Because I have thought it over and decided that it is quite irrational to me. Though you know, I wish I could be a God fearing individual, have promises of a nirvana after death. But its not something you can force and I'm pretty sure an omnipotent God would know if I were faking.

My only known alternatives are: 1) I die and stay dead, in the ground, forever. 2) I go to hell, forever.

Yeah, those both sound pretty awesome. Definitely makes me a coward to know that I face one of these options, and still continue on this path.

Little_Miss_1565
10-28-2008, 08:38 PM
You're STILL discussing what humans have done. As soon as you do that, you're not answering the question I've raised. This is supposed to be GOD'S book. Human beings wrote it, but they were supposedly inspired by God. So if anything in that book is immoral or inaccurate, then I guess God fucked up. You and Sunny completely missed the point, even though what you're saying is true on some level.

Yeah, it's "supposed" to be God's book, but he didn't write a word of it. Humans did. I can think of many people off the top of my head who did horrible things while claiming that God was on their side. Can you tell me definitively who actually in the Bible had the direct telephone line to Heaven and who was making shit up to get their own agenda across? And really, if God created free will then he can't he held responsible for the stupid things humans do in his name. So if you're going to try to be devil's advocate, I'd suggest shoring up your straw arguments in the future, and if you're being serious then I'm worried.


Yes, except no. I didn't say I was sure about anything. I was saying that
people who are sure about something are completely retarded. They're the
ones who pretend they're right. I'm saying it's wrong to believe ANYTHING.

This is ridiculous. I am absolutely sure of many things--the rightness and wrongness of certain things I believe, and how sure I am that kitty snuggles and a beer on the couch are heavenly. Perhaps I'm being glib. But nihilism stopped being fashionable when Rancid wrote a song about it.


Thanks, I suppose. Yes, Iamsam is a complete idiot and he's being rude for
the sake of it, like always. Being one of the worst assholes on the boards, I
find it rather surprising that he doesn't get reprimanded more often. I think it's
mostly due to the fact that he takes the safe, cowardly path of swearing at
people who are already against the popular opinion, therefore placing himself
in a certain security with a group. I'd best describe him as a coward with no
strong opinions or convictions who enjoys putting others down when he has
the chance.

For someone who doesn't think anyone should believe in anything, you sure do have the martyr act down. And I think he's proven that he does have strong opinions and convictions -- by the way, having strong opinions and convictions are what you are arguing against so I don't know why you are using it as an insult -- and there are a lot of people who enjoy putting others down when they have the chance, and several of them are your friends here.


Then it sounds to me like God needs to step up his game a little bit. He must really be getting rusty up there. You know, to let that sort of thing happen to the book that is the sole reason anyone would believe in Him (from a Christian perspective). I want to worship a God that's powerful enough to not let the book that the ENTIRE religion is based around be corrupted by mere human beings.

Or maybe I should draw another conclusion...

Are you being serious here? I really can't tell. I can only hope you're not.

bighead384
10-28-2008, 09:15 PM
First of all, why are you being so condescending in a discussion about something so abstract and difficult for everyone to understand? I got a little sarcastic in one of my posts, but it was because I felt like people were completely ignoring what I was really saying and because that's just the way I wanted to make my point. I never said anything to make anyone arguing this subject feel inferior like you're doing.

Anyway, it's not up to me to decide who had a direct telephone line into Heaven and who was making shit up. If Christianity is the truth, then there shouldn't be any "shit" in the Bible in the first place. True, God can't be responsible for EVERYTHING humans do in his name, but c'mon...the freakin' BOOK that the entire religion is based on?

wheelchairman
10-29-2008, 07:44 AM
Like Sunny I've also read the bible (albeit only once) and I've even read into the different mainstream interpretations of the bible. (Covenant Theology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant_Theology) and Dispensationalism) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism)

The book was slow enough reading, but as is typical of wiki the complete condensation of information makes it slow reading on the webpages. But it is quite interesting. In my opinion especially dispensationalism. Which kinds of views the governments of man in relation to the Grace of God. Sort of using bible prophecy as an interpretation of history. (As far as I can recall it declares that the end of times will happen when the old Roman empire is reunited (the EU) and chooses for itself a charismatic leader. This leader is the anti-christ and will first pretend to be a friend of the Israeli people, but later on betray them.)

Also be on the look for ritualistic animal sacrifices and a 1000 year empire coming soon!

But really back to the point. Is the bible immoral? No of course not. A book is an inanimate object.

But seriously. It's immoral if you are looking to fine the immoral in it. Think of the bible as a 2000 year old book. Society was different back then. There are some revolutionary moral concepts in the bible that are just amazing.

The phrase "Go the extra mile" comes from early christianity. During the roman Empire (and you will remember that Judea was part of this empire) Roman soldiers could demand civilians to carry their equipment for one mile. The Christians would offer to carry the equipment for 2 miles, despite the fact that the Romans were their oppressors and enemies.

Jesus prevented the execution of a prostitute (which was simply incomprehensible back then, as sex was dirty in the past.)

The whole concept of love your neighbor, turn the other cheek, the meek shall inherit the earth, hell even basic concepts of social responsibility all go back to the new testament.

Morals that most of us adhere to, yet were defined 2000 years ago. (And really our morals should be completely different, wouldn't you think? With all the major changes that have happened since you would think that these societal norms would have changed.)

Now if we could only convince the Christian Fundamentalists in the US of this fact....

metalmania
10-29-2008, 11:14 AM
i saw the news in newspaper about obama and iran "iran wants to obama cause their belief says that he's(tall and black man) a messiah and he will control his country's armies" and iran is a muslim place (a scet of muslim)and obama means holy in their language! anyway i dont believe this news but i guess mc cain or obama!no matter cause their middleeast policy is same("mccain says iraq obstruction will contunie" and obama says"no it will not but our soldiers will go to afghanistan from iraq) so they will attack again ;) hm somebody says that obama is communist haha i can just smile for this view cause usa never permits to a communist president ;) its just comic.lets think " a communist president in the biggest capitalist country" yeah it can be a perfect caricature ... mc cain was working in civil social organizations(NED vs) and their purpose was make the new colourly revolution in sybria,georgia,ukraine... and they will do with george soros.so he knows these places but obama is foreign for these places.new problems re waiting them there:middleeast oils,russia problem,afghanistan problem,cyprus problem,armenia problem...i hope a good person will be president for usa and world cause bush's management was so terrible and his mistakes takeaway to crisis to usa and europe ;)
go and choose your man ;)

IamSam
10-29-2008, 12:34 PM
Iamsam, so what you are saying is; that because I don't believe in God and Heaven I am a coward?

You are implying, that I, an atheist who doesn't by into the possibility of a God or omnipotent being am cowardly? Because I have thought it over and decided that it is quite irrational to me. Though you know, I wish I could be a God fearing individual, have promises of a nirvana after death. But its not something you can force and I'm pretty sure an omnipotent God would know if I were faking.

My only known alternatives are: 1) I die and stay dead, in the ground, forever. 2) I go to hell, forever.

Yeah, those both sound pretty awesome. Definitely makes me a coward to know that I face one of these options, and still continue on this path.

You are kind of putting words into my mouth. I'm saying not calling atheists cowards. I'm saying that it takes a lot more strength to believe in something not known versus not believe at all. Does that make sense at all?

Little_Miss_1565
10-29-2008, 12:46 PM
First of all, why are you being so condescending in a discussion about something so abstract and difficult for everyone to understand? I got a little sarcastic in one of my posts, but it was because I felt like people were completely ignoring what I was really saying and because that's just the way I wanted to make my point. I never said anything to make anyone arguing this subject feel inferior like you're doing.

Anyway, it's not up to me to decide who had a direct telephone line into Heaven and who was making shit up. If Christianity is the truth, then there shouldn't be any "shit" in the Bible in the first place. True, God can't be responsible for EVERYTHING humans do in his name, but c'mon...the freakin' BOOK that the entire religion is based on?

Because you're being absolutist to the point of being glib about how a religion marks out its base. There are so many different sects of Christianity because none of them agree about how the Bible is supposed to play out in the practice of their religion, so you can't go around painting all of Christianity with the widest brush ever without expecting some heated response. Religions persist for thousands of years because people never stop interpreting and reinterpreting and reinterpreting those interpretations, and the process of teasing out meaning from contradictory messages is what the whole thing is all about. That's why people go to church every Sunday, to hear it from their community's religious leaders. Expecting one book to be the definitive, non-contradictory point of leadership for all of Christianity today seems to me like way too much to ask.

bighead384
10-29-2008, 12:47 PM
You are kind of putting words into my mouth. I'm saying not calling atheists cowards. I'm saying that it takes a lot more strength to believe in something not known versus not believe at all. Does that make sense at all?

I like how you're changing what you're saying now, but even in doing this, you couldn't admit that what you initially said (AND kept insisting) was fucked up and wrong. What's that say about you? And honestly, I don't think it takes more strength (or kahonas) to believe in God. When you believe in God, you have someone watching over you, and a nice place to go when you die where you reunite with your loved ones.

IamSam
10-29-2008, 12:52 PM
I like how you're changing what you're saying now, but even in doing this, you couldn't admit that what you initially said (AND kept insisting) was fucked up and wrong. What's that say about you? And honestly, I don't think it takes more strength (or kahonas) to believe in God. When you believe in God, you have someone watching over you, and a nice place to go when you die where you reunite with your loved ones.

Learn to read.

bighead384
10-29-2008, 01:02 PM
Because you're being absolutist to the point of being glib about how a religion marks out its base. There are so many different sects of Christianity because none of them agree about how the Bible is supposed to play out in the practice of their religion, so you can't go around painting all of Christianity with the widest brush ever without expecting some heated response. Religions persist for thousands of years because people never stop interpreting and reinterpreting and reinterpreting those interpretations, and the process of teasing out meaning from contradictory messages is what the whole thing is all about. That's why people go to church every Sunday, to hear it from their community's religious leaders. Expecting one book to be the definitive, non-contradictory point of leadership for all of Christianity today seems to me like way too much to ask.
At the end of the day, all Christians use the Bible. I'm not going to respect other sects of Christianity more because they interpret the Bible in a different way, often leaving parts of it out, because in my mind, you shouldn't HAVE to do that if your religion is the truth.

If God's real, who are you to say that God accepts that the Bible got fucked up because he expects people to understand that human nature fucked it up? Is that fair to people who want to believe but are confused by all the fucked up shit in the Bible? You can all draw your own conclusions about the Bible, but I'm just stating my beliefs which affect no one else, and I don't think there's any need to try and prove them to be irrational. Especially if you're not even Christian.

bighead384
10-29-2008, 01:04 PM
I've been called out on saying something stupid, but I have a huge ego, so I'm going to try and take the high ground with a stupid attack comment that allows me to not have to explain myself.

I totally agree.

Little_Miss_1565
10-29-2008, 02:10 PM
At the end of the day, all Christians use the Bible. I'm not going to respect other sects of Christianity more because they interpret the Bible in a different way, often leaving parts of it out, because in my mind, you shouldn't HAVE to do that if your religion is the truth.

If God's real, who are you to say that God accepts that the Bible got fucked up because he expects people to understand that human nature fucked it up? Is that fair to people who want to believe but are confused by all the fucked up shit in the Bible? You can all draw your own conclusions about the Bible, but I'm just stating my beliefs which affect no one else, and I don't think there's any need to try and prove them to be irrational. Especially if you're not even Christian.

I don't give a fuck what "God says" and I could not care less about the Bible as anything but a beautifully written work of fiction, so perhaps you're barking up the wrong tree. What I'm taking issue with is your oversimplification of a complex issue, but that does fit in with your overarching theme of anti-intellectualism.

bighead384
10-29-2008, 03:11 PM
I don't give a fuck what "God says" and I could not care less about the Bible as anything but a beautifully written work of fiction, so perhaps you're barking up the wrong tree. What I'm taking issue with is your oversimplification of a complex issue, but that does fit in with your overarching theme of anti-intellectualism.

Wow. Whatever.

wheelchairman
10-29-2008, 03:24 PM
At the end of the day, all Christians use the Bible. I'm not going to respect other sects of Christianity more because they interpret the Bible in a different way, often leaving parts of it out, because in my mind, you shouldn't HAVE to do that if your religion is the truth.

If God's real, who are you to say that God accepts that the Bible got fucked up because he expects people to understand that human nature fucked it up? Is that fair to people who want to believe but are confused by all the fucked up shit in the Bible? You can all draw your own conclusions about the Bible, but I'm just stating my beliefs which affect no one else, and I don't think there's any need to try and prove them to be irrational. Especially if you're not even Christian.

Usually you should be wary of people who claim to speak for God. As far as I recalled God's covenant to mankind after the great flood was not to interfere with mankind's development. (sort of like Starfleet)

Bipolar Bear
10-29-2008, 05:30 PM
3. Wrong. I've actually been a dick to wheelchairman and Sin Studly. Two individuals who have been on here a long time. Me swearing at the people who are against the popular opinion is not a big deal. Why? Those who aren't in the general publics opinion are normally individuals who display a general lack of brain power, a lack of respect, or are non-descript individuals who normally ask for a verbal beat down.

4. I am not a coward, and yes I do have strong convictions. Do I voice these convictions? No. I own up to my mistakes and I stand by what I say. On this board I do not put others down unless it is warrented. Me saying that you lacked the guts to believe in something unseen was completly warrented due to your unwarrented attacks on the majority of the worlds beliefs.

Alright, I'd first like to address something in the third point you made. More precisely, this part:

Those who aren't in the general publics opinion are normally individuals
who display a general lack of brain power, a lack of respect, or are
non-descript individuals who normally ask for a verbal beat down.

I've never heard of anything so ridiculous. I can list a thousand examples, but
one will suffice I think. Back when slavery was common, there was a vote in
Canada and most people agreed that slavery should remain legal.
Does that mean that this popular opinion was right?
Would believing the contrary display a lack of brain power or judgement?

The popular opinion isn't necessarily the right one. You say you have strong
convictions of your own, yet come up with statements as idiotic as the one I
italicized above, which would make someone think that you'd only adopt the
public opinion since all other ones would display a lack of "brain power". It's
actually quite the contrary; those who follow the crowd are more likely dumb.

In point 4, the cowardly argument was particularly ironic, since religions very
often use fear to control their believers. People are scared to not follow a
religion due to concepts such as hell which are effective in scaring people and
making them respect the religion's rules.

I've actually been a dick to wheelchairman and Sin Studly

At least you admit it.

Me swearing at the people who are against the popular opinion is not a big deal

You shouldn't swear at people for not being in the popular opinion. What you
do is inexcusable and pathetic. Don't act as if it's right because it isn't. It's
because of people like you that certain people who don't fit in encounter
problems and feel miserable in life. I suggest you think about your behavior.

Llamas
10-29-2008, 06:36 PM
Wow, this has become a very interesting debate, with a lot of good points.

bighead, I don't think you are wrong here, but I do think you are being more absolutist than you should be, possibly just to stir up controversy and cause more fights. I'll come back to you in a bit, but first:


You are kind of putting words into my mouth. I'm saying not calling atheists cowards. I'm saying that it takes a lot more strength to believe in something not known versus not believe at all. Does that make sense at all?
I disagree. I think that believing in something unknown often is the weak route- you take comfort in "knowing" what is going on, having a defined belief. I was Christian for 19 years, and then became atheist, and ended up agnostic. Being agnostic is by FAR the most difficult. It was so easy to be Christian and feel certain that I was going to heaven and knowing why I was on earth, etc, etc. Being atheist was pretty easy, too. But being agnostic is difficult every single day. I believe in God, but I constantly question everything. I'm unsure of a lot, and I soooo wish that some religion just made sense and I was able to truly believe it. But I can't. And it sucks.


Bighead. Here's how I view the bible. The bible was written as an account of God's life. Of course it's flawed. Of course God didn't control it or what's in it. He's not going to have the bible be re-written every time he thinks society has changed in a way the bible should reflect. The idea that God gave humans free will means that he doesn't control what we believe, and he doesn't control how we spread the word of him.
Personally, my biggest conflict with the bible is that it has been translated so many times, through such vastly different languages. Many things just plain do NOT translate between languages, and I've even heard things like Jesus was originally a female as written in Hebrew, but in Hebrew there is no pronoun "he" or "she", but it's always "it". So Jesus was "it", and you have to find gender in the adjective or verb, or something... when it got translated, somehow the gender got confused and the wrong pronoun was used.

I don't know if that's even true, but it's enough of a possibility that it makes things very difficult regarding me believing the bible. If I was able to read Hebrew natively and could read the very first bible, I totally would. But come on, King James version bible can't possibly say the same thing the first bible did. Plus, you not only have all this translation, but you also have the fact that people "interpret" what things mean in order to put things in simpler terms that modern people can understand easier. Interpreting like that requires guesswork. Nobody could ever KNOW exactly what the bible means or meant. People put their faith in others to tell them what it means, because those people claim God works through them.

bighead384
10-29-2008, 06:52 PM
bighead, I don't think you are wrong here, but I do think you are being more absolutist than you should be, possibly just to stir up controversy and cause more fights.:

I'm glad you're considering my arguments but there's really no need to act like I probably have bad intentions for no reason, or even mention it. Anyway, I'll read what you wrote later...

Llamas
10-29-2008, 06:56 PM
I'm glad you're considering my arguments but there's really no need to act like I probably have bad intentions for no reason.

To be fair, you have a history of it. I'm not assuming you definitely are doing that, but I'm thinking it's possible. You seem a bit unwilling to make any concessions or discuss things calmly. You're not all wrong here, but you're just being kind of absolutist.

bighead384
10-29-2008, 07:03 PM
To be fair, you have a history of it. I'm not assuming you definitely are doing that, but I'm thinking it's possible. You seem a bit unwilling to make any concessions or discuss things calmly. You're not all wrong here, but you're just being kind of absolutist.

Alright, whatever. I don't really agree but whatever.

IamSam
10-29-2008, 07:10 PM
I disagree. I think that believing in something unknown often is the weak route- you take comfort in "knowing" what is going on, having a defined belief. I was Christian for 19 years, and then became atheist, and ended up agnostic. Being agnostic is by FAR the most difficult. It was so easy to be Christian and feel certain that I was going to heaven and knowing why I was on earth, etc, etc. Being atheist was pretty easy, too. But being agnostic is difficult every single day. I believe in God, but I constantly question everything. I'm unsure of a lot, and I soooo wish that some religion just made sense and I was able to truly believe it. But I can't. And it sucks.



I haven't thought about it that way. Thank you for sharing your perspective!



Bipolar: tl;dr and don't care really.

WebDudette
10-29-2008, 07:14 PM
llamas basically said what I was trying to say. I'm atheist but it isn't easy for me to believe that I have no chance at a happy after life.

Llamas
10-29-2008, 07:17 PM
I'd just like to point out that iamsam has never once struck me as being an asshole or anything of the sort. He's always seemed level headed and calm. And before anyone says anything about him being on the "in" crowd or 1337 or something stupid, there are a lot of people I like here (and a lot more than I like iamsam- I haven't really had that many conversations with him, but mostly just have read his posts) who are not usually so, and a lot of people I don't like who are. I just think it's kind of out there for anyone to attack iamsam for that, when he's quite unguilty of this.

WebDudette
10-29-2008, 07:20 PM
Hmm? I just found it unnecessary for him to be as hostile as using something like ignorant slut. He explained it, but pretty confident most people didn't pick up on the reference and it was still unnecessary.

Llamas
10-29-2008, 07:26 PM
Hmm? I just found it unnecessary for him to be as hostile as using something like ignorant slut. He explained it, but pretty confident most people didn't pick up on the reference and it was still unnecessary.

Hmm, must've been in a different thread? I read a post from someone (not you) where someone said that iamsam swears at people and insults people who aren't "accepted" and doesn't get reprimanded for it.

WebDudette
10-29-2008, 07:28 PM
Oh, it was this thread, I think it was bighead. I thought you were originally referring to me though.

Llamas
10-29-2008, 07:40 PM
Yeah, I posted that thinking I was double posting... I didn't know you posted in between, which made my post seem directed at you.

IamSam
10-29-2008, 08:15 PM
I didn't find ignorant slut anywhere in this thread, but yeah. Bad judgment on my part on that one.

PILZ-E...I get what you're saying now that llamas has explained it a little more. I've never thought about it from that perspective.

I have been an asshole on occasion, but only to a select few: Bipolar/Jim/etc., bighead, and offspringhead, mainly because they line themselves up for it. Sometimes though, I'm not the first to call them on it...and they normally only pick me out for being an 'elitist-intellectual-swine' or some damn thing.

RickyCrack
10-29-2008, 09:00 PM
jane you ignorant slut

srsly though I find it hard to argue the bible as being immoral. many of our founding fathers and leaders of the enlightenment movement were agnostic or atheist. however they believed that the bible layed down a basic frame in which morality is set in. the bible is represented heavily in the bill of rights. the first and foremost these dudes believed in was that all humans were. created with inaliable rights bestowed from our creator. this is the premise of our bill of rights as a way to put gods law into human embodiment. and do NOT give me some anarcho response saying our government is flawed. I'm talking about the basis in which america was founded.

Bipolar Bear
10-30-2008, 09:47 AM
Bipolar: tl;dr and don't care really.


You have nothing more to add I presume? After the last post I made you
probably realized you had just lost the argument. At that point, you had two options.
You could have left in elegance or you could have posted a trollish comment like the
one I quoted above. Knowing you, I'm not surprised you choose the latter. I'm
perfectly willing to continue our discussion if you change your mind and choose to
argue for slavery or picking on people who don't fit in.

[ http://www.offspring.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1209189&postcount=98 ]

Thanks, I had fun.

IamSam
10-30-2008, 10:18 AM
You have nothing more to add I presume? After the last post I made you
probably realized you had just lost the argument. At that point, you had two options.
You could have left in elegance or you could have posted a trollish comment like the
one I quoted above. Knowing you, I'm not surprised you choose the latter.

And how often have you posted trollish comments? 20, 50...too many times to count? Don't act like you are above me or better than me because you are not. You've done some pretty heinous things on this board in the past that don't equal up to 1/4 of the things I have done.

That being said, how is saying too long, didn't read, and I don't really care a trollish statement? A trollish statement would have just been telling you to fuck off and get a life, but I decided that would have been counter productive.

Now, I'll address this slavery issue, just because you seem like you really want to talk about it. Don't really know why.


I've never heard of anything so ridiculous. I can list a thousand examples, but
one will suffice I think. Back when slavery was common, there was a vote in
Canada and most people agreed that slavery should remain legal.
Does that mean that this popular opinion was right?
Would believing the contrary display a lack of brain power or judgement?

Your logic is flawed. Comparing slavery in Canada to yourself doesn't work. Other than being a slave what did these people do to deserve their treatment? Nothing. What have you and others done to deserve the treatment I have given you?

1. Started your life off as a troll.
True, you may have 'reformed' your ways, but you are still a troll. Look what you are doing here. You derailed an entire thread about Obama and Islam to this point: An argument over issues that get us nowhere . Sure, you may have stopped posting porn all over the forums, but you're still that guy. What does that have to do with slavery? Nothing. Goes to show that slaves weren't trolls. Slaves 1.

2. The Anti-Authority Group
While slaves had every reason to create an anti-authority group and challenge the man, you do not. People who make waves just to make waves are a nuisance on the board. Slaves who made waves made waves for good reason, such as poor living conditions, crummy hours, or shitty food. Seeing that you can come and go on this board as you please, posting within guidelines that are very loose, you really never had a leg to stand on. Which is why the anti-authority group got shut down. There was no reason to it, and you once again took it too seriously and too far. Slaves win. Again.

3. Slaves didn't grasp at straws.
This entire argument that we are having right now is laughable, at best. Back when you were more of a pain in the ass nothing stopped you from posting porn, obscenities, and tirades against 'the man.' Now that you've 'reformed' you have to grasp as straws hoping that you can stir up trouble without really appearing that you are meaning to stir up trouble. Slaves didn't have to grasp at straws. They had actual reasons to stir up trouble. Win to the slaves.

And to answer your question, yes the vote to keep slavery was right at the time. I want to stress that again, at the time. Because, like the Bible (amazing I can slip that in here as well), times were different. There was a different moral set at the time. It's exactly like Americans looking back at slavery in the US and saying 'yeah...we shouldn't have done that...our bad.' And while you can attempt to compare yourself to the slaves, it doesn't correspond. There is no firm ground you can stand upon to compare yourself to slaves that actually had to go through discrimination, beatings, etc. They did nothing wrong to begin with and they had actual reasons to be pissed. Unlike you.

Good day to you, I am done with you. Insult me more if you like, but to me you've already sunk your ship by comparing yourself to slaves. It proves that you are who I thought you were.

JoY
10-30-2008, 10:41 AM
I disagree. I think that believing in something unknown often is the weak route- you take comfort in "knowing" what is going on, having a defined belief. I was Christian for 19 years, and then became atheist, and ended up agnostic. Being agnostic is by FAR the most difficult. It was so easy to be Christian and feel certain that I was going to heaven and knowing why I was on earth, etc, etc. Being atheist was pretty easy, too. But being agnostic is difficult every single day. I believe in God, but I constantly question everything. I'm unsure of a lot, and I soooo wish that some religion just made sense and I was able to truly believe it. But I can't. And it sucks.


wow, HONESTLY. I disagree. well, maybe it's like that for you, I can't judge that of course. for me, it's pure & utter convenience to leave religion for what it is. yes, we live in a convenience-oriented society.

my dear god, if I may say so, I couldn't have bared to attempt to preserve my faith in God in the difficult times I've been through. sure, God is not to interfere with mankind, but God or maybe just religion itself is sort of supposed to give you comfort, hope & strength of some sort, no? & there have been times I've experiences, well, not too much of any of those, to put it nicely. afterwards it's possible for me to say God pulled me through or stood by me in these difficult times, but god knows at the time it totally felt like I was entirely on my own. & that's not because I believe there is no God, because that ain't exactly the case.

if you think being religious is the weak route, babe, then your faith has never been challenged in the time you were still Christian, before you went from Christian to atheist to agnostic. which I find a lot to be in such a short amount of time & such a short life.

if I were to be atheist, I wouldn't be able to accept the existence of things I hear, see & experienced, that can't be explained. & I know those things exist, things that I can't explain & that nobody can explain, so that would be completely contradictory in my head & imagine the discussions that went on in my mind, if I excluded the possibility of a God completely.

dude, not believing in God & not believing there isn't a God (just as much a belief) is the easy life, if you ask me.

Little_Miss_1565
10-30-2008, 11:03 AM
As annoyed as I am by certain forum members, holding someone's troll beginnings over their head for all eternity isn't cool. I'm sure you're able to dismantle his argument for what it is on its face and now, IamSam.

JoY
10-30-2008, 11:07 AM
totally agreed. *thumbs up*

Bipolar Bear
10-30-2008, 11:09 AM
And how often have you posted trollish comments? 20, 50...too many times to count? Don't act like you are above me or better than me because you are not. You've done some pretty heinous things on this board in the past that don't equal up to 1/4 of the things I have done.

That being said, how is saying too long, didn't read, and I don't really care a trollish statement? A trollish statement would have just been telling you to fuck off and get a life, but I decided that would have been counter productive.

Now, I'll address this slavery issue, just because you seem like you really want to talk about it. Don't really know why.



Your logic is flawed. Comparing slavery in Canada to yourself doesn't work. Other than being a slave what did these people do to deserve their treatment? Nothing. What have you and others done to deserve the treatment I have given you?

1. Started your life off as a troll.
True, you may have 'reformed' your ways, but you are still a troll. Look what you are doing here. You derailed an entire thread about Obama and Islam to this point: An argument over issues that get us nowhere . Sure, you may have stopped posting porn all over the forums, but you're still that guy. What does that have to do with slavery? Nothing. Goes to show that slaves weren't trolls. Slaves 1.

2. The Anti-Authority Group
While slaves had every reason to create an anti-authority group and challenge the man, you do not. People who make waves just to make waves are a nuisance on the board. Slaves who made waves made waves for good reason, such as poor living conditions, crummy hours, or shitty food. Seeing that you can come and go on this board as you please, posting within guidelines that are very loose, you really never had a leg to stand on. Which is why the anti-authority group got shut down. There was no reason to it, and you once again took it too seriously and too far. Slaves win. Again.

3. Slaves didn't grasp at straws.
This entire argument that we are having right now is laughable, at best. Back when you were more of a pain in the ass nothing stopped you from posting porn, obscenities, and tirades against 'the man.' Now that you've 'reformed' you have to grasp as straws hoping that you can stir up trouble without really appearing that you are meaning to stir up trouble. Slaves didn't have to grasp at straws. They had actual reasons to stir up trouble. Win to the slaves.

And to answer your question, yes the vote to keep slavery was right at the time. I want to stress that again, at the time. Because, like the Bible (amazing I can slip that in here as well), times were different. There was a different moral set at the time. It's exactly like Americans looking back at slavery in the US and saying 'yeah...we shouldn't have done that...our bad.' And while you can attempt to compare yourself to the slaves, it doesn't correspond. There is no firm ground you can stand upon to compare yourself to slaves that actually had to go through discrimination, beatings, etc. They did nothing wrong to begin with and they had actual reasons to be pissed. Unlike you.

Good day to you, I am done with you. Insult me more if you like, but to me you've already sunk your ship by comparing yourself to slaves. It proves that you are who I thought you were.

I wasn't comparing myself to slaves. I was addressing the issue generally.
You've said that people who strayed from the popular opinion deserved to
be treated like shit. I've proven you wrong. Your arguments have nothing to
do with what I was saying, and you know it. You went off in a tangent.
You're trying to prove that I'm not a slave, which is completely irrelevant. Of
course, I'm not a slave or anything of the like, that is evident and wasn't
what I was saying. I hope you realize this. Reread your post.

By the way, I've just searched tl;dr on google. I suggest you do the same.
The first thing it comes up with is "troll abbreviation".


As annoyed as I am by certain forum members, holding someone's troll beginnings over their head for all eternity isn't cool. I'm sure you're able to dismantle his argument for what it is on its face and now, IamSam.

Thanks. He isn't able though; that's why he just played the "you sucked before so you deserve to get crap" card when
it was completely uncalled for.

Little_Miss_1565
10-30-2008, 11:12 AM
BB, it's really useless to continue this frame of argument. IamSam is wrong for continuing to treat you like a troll even when you're attempting to not be, but at the same time you shouldn't expect to be taken seriously all the time due to the experience others have had with you. People tend to be pretty forgiving here so just wait it out and continue to contribute to discussion.

Tl;dr is not a "troll abbreviation," it's a forum meme.

IamSam
10-30-2008, 11:26 AM
As annoyed as I am by certain forum members, holding someone's troll beginnings over their head for all eternity isn't cool. I'm sure you're able to dismantle his argument for what it is on its face and now, IamSam.

Sorry for holding it over his head, but at the same time he shouldn't be bringing up my past of treating him like it. I've tried the past couple months to be civil towards BB, but BB continues to drag me through the muck in which case I bring up his trolling. It's wrong, I know, but it is also 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

BB: I misinterpreted your slave post I guess. Still, comparing members of a forum to slaves is way out in left field. I see what you're saying, but I still think it was a poor analogy. You did not win, mainly because it is rather cheap to 'win' on a misinterpretation.

I also have a proposition for you: Us going on into eternity forever and ever dredging up stuff from the past and constantly arguing is not constructive to either one of us. I would like to apologize for my part in the matter and wish to move on. I'm passing you an olive branch and I hope that you receive it. I want to make a more concentrated effort to treat you and your new found board life fairly. If I treat you with a way that you deem to be unfair, please PM me and let me know.

Deal?

Bipolar Bear
10-30-2008, 02:11 PM
Sorry for holding it over his head, but at the same time he shouldn't be bringing up my past of treating him like it. I've tried the past couple months to be civil towards BB, but BB continues to drag me through the muck in which case I bring up his trolling. It's wrong, I know, but it is also 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

BB: I misinterpreted your slave post I guess. Still, comparing members of a forum to slaves is way out in left field. I see what you're saying, but I still think it was a poor analogy. You did not win, mainly because it is rather cheap to 'win' on a misinterpretation.

I also have a proposition for you: Us going on into eternity forever and ever dredging up stuff from the past and constantly arguing is not constructive to either one of us. I would like to apologize for my part in the matter and wish to move on. I'm passing you an olive branch and I hope that you receive it. I want to make a more concentrated effort to treat you and your new found board life fairly. If I treat you with a way that you deem to be unfair, please PM me and let me know.

Deal?

Just for the record, you were the one who dragged me through the muck
with the ignorant slut post. There's only so much I can take, after which
I get irritated. Apart from that, I agree with you and I'm perfectly willing to
move on and treat you respectfully, as I've said before in the ideal school
thread. I have no desire of continuing along this path or of making enemies,
so I accept your proposition. If I hold an opinion which you don't, which is
bound to happen, you can of course express yourself but there's no need
to go too far with insults and the like. For my part, I'm sorry if I've said
anything in this thread you found hurtful or demeaning, and I'm glad you've
taken the initiative of making peace.

RickyCrack
10-30-2008, 03:57 PM
I dont see a problem with the ignorant slut comment as its a very famous snl quote which if you understand the reference was used in a fairly comical way. however if you dont understand the reference its pretty petty to get offended if somebody uses a word symbolizing how much sex you get as an insult.

Bipolar Bear
10-30-2008, 05:45 PM
I dont see a problem with the ignorant slut comment as its a very famous snl quote which if you understand the reference was used in a fairly comical way. however if you dont understand the reference its pretty petty to get offended if somebody uses a word symbolizing how much sex you get as an insult.

Don't worry, I wasn't offended in the least at that point. I was simply
irritated after having been called ignorant half a dozen times 3 pages later. I
usually wouldn't have described sam the way I did except
that it had been numerous occasions in which he'd done such a thing.
If it were only for this one time, it would have been different.

That being said, I can understand how people can get very sensitive when
their religious beliefs are contradicted, and I should have seen this coming.
Posting that religious people have some thinking to do in a public forum is
bound to generate strong debate. I guess I was only hoping it wouldn't
come to insults and such. This was nevertheless an interesting conversation.

jacknife737
10-30-2008, 07:35 PM
By the way, I've just searched tl;dr on google. I suggest you do the same.
The first thing it comes up with is "troll abbreviation".


http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/e/e6/Hahaawareness.jpg 10 characters

calichix
11-07-2008, 01:19 PM
god, watching sunny argue with this bipolarbear yahoo is like watching a tiger attack a paraplegic (with down's syndrome).



I love how you say, "all religions are fake". as if theories, ideas, parables, and metaphors are tangible. ps wtf is a troll?

sKratch
11-07-2008, 03:27 PM
http://www.salagir.com/gfx/troll-web.jpg
What is a troll? (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/What_is_a_troll%3F)